ConnecticutBob.Com is a modest blog on the internet since 2006. Progressive ideas are encouraged, and all politically-minded and reasonable people are welcome. America is the greatest country in the world, but we'll bomb you if you disagree.

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

"PO or No!"

Probably the best suggestion I've heard for a rallying cry in favor of the public option in the current health insurance reform debate.

Can't get a much simpler slogan than six letters, three words: PO or No! (h/t TimO). Either health reform contains a public option or there's no health reform. This is the "now go make me do it" chapter of Barack Obama's presidency.

No public option? No health care bill in the House.No public option in the conference report? No passage of the conference report.No public option? No walking back from Progressive Caucus promises: no bill.

Andrea Mitchell can say "they won't do that" all she wants about the Democratic United States Senators with an identifiable conflict of interest, either familial or campaign-finance based. But in the House, there are 60 progressives (others say 100) who say: "PO or No!"

I don't think we've had a simpler. more succinct lefty slogan since "No Blood For Oil." Let's hope "PO or No!" turns out better than that one did.

Speaking of Andrea Mitchell, she may need to either finally retire or at least get a decent pair of reading glasses. Watch how she mangles the blog's name when she begins and ends her interview with Jane Hamsher yesterday.

And Jane did a terrific job (as usual) with Mrs. Greenspan's lame beltway-opined interview. The current public option plan IS the compromise, the middle ground, considering the Democrats originally wanted single-payer health insurance, This point seems to get lost in the raucous din of the conservative insurance shills:

Where the hell is the reform without the PO?! As someone said, yesterday morning, co-ops are bound to fail - look at Blue Cross/Blue Shield. And the Republicans don't even support that. I agree, it's PO or NO!

so whatever happened to "A 35 year old woman, married with three childrenA 39 year old man, married with no childrenA 32 year old single woman who works as a legal secretaryA 38 year old single man who works as a research scientist at the National Cancer Institute... I'll tell you what the research says and see what you think."I'm really curious to what the research says.

WHB, you got it right. The only thing dragging this debate out longer does is leave larger rhetoric void only to be filled by gun toting teabaggers. Which reminds me, CTBob, are you going to weigh in on these nuts out in Phoenix that are bringing loaded guns to political rallies?

They covered the gun thing over on My Left Nutmeg a day or two ago, and I would have said pretty much the same thing.

Even though I'm a legal gun owner and possess a valid CT handgun permit, I still think a person has to be a complete asshole to not only carry their gun to a public event such as a town hall meeting, but to also publicly DISPLAY the thing!

Although, out west some states probably still have laws that require anyone carrying to NOT conceal it. That's how New Mexico was when I spent a summer out there 30 years ago. You could get arrested for hiding a gun in your pocket, but not for using a visible holster. Weird.